I have been following the story of Bill and Lou, the oxen at Green Mountain College through the James McWilliams blog. Today he has posted an opinion piece from the Rutland Herald written by a philosophy prof at GMC and I find it the most disturbing thing I have read to date: http://james-mcwilliams.com/

Here is a quote: "In addition to the inaccuracies and inflammatory rhetoric of their “end justifies the means” approach, vegan abolitionists suppose, wrongly, that there’s a single right way (theirs) to reason about this vexing ethical matter, that they (and not the teamsters who have worked with Bill and Lou for a decade) are obviously the best-positioned proxies to speak for the oxen’s interests"

The problem is that there is only one way to reason about this "vexing" issue if you are in fact speaking in the best interests of Bill and Lou (and only Bill and Lou, not all the other animals in the world). It reminds me of one of those pseudo-philosophical questions: Someone holds a gun to your head and says, "You must choose. Either you die or a small boy in Colombia will die."

I am just so sick of the intellectual mumbo-jumbo that surrounds not only this issue but all meat eating discussions. If you want to eat meat, accept and admit that you are killing animals to satisfy your urges. You do not need to eat the meat, the animal does not die nobly for your cause, the animal does not give a shiitake that you are "honouring" its flesh, and just because it had a less crappy life than some other crated pig or caged chicken does not elevate you, and all the other crepe ad nauseum.

I guess it makes me a lot sadder to see people tie themselves in knots to justify killing animals than to see people just eat meat.

I'm so confused by that statement. How is killing a pair of oxen instead of giving them to a sanctuary that has offered to take them the same as deciding between myself being killed vs allowing a child in another country being killed?

Other articles have quoted students of the school saying they felt it would be such an honor to eat Lou and Bill...yep, I'm sure Lou and Bill feel the exact same way. How about this, when Lou and Bill decide to pick up a knife and kill themselves next to the cafeteria doors, then you'll know for sure that this is what they truly wanted. Until then I'm pretty sure all the clear cut indications you'll ever be able to gather from them is that they like hanging out with each other (because that's what they do), they like eating grass (because that's what they do), they like breathing air (because that's what they do), and they probably like peeing and crapping (because that's what they do). What we don't have any evidence for is this asinine notion that they have some deep seeded desire to forfeit their lives for a few of your meals because you like the taste of dead animals.

_________________Imma let you finish, but the Paranthropus Boisei were the greatest vegans ever.

Ugh I saw all these cave paintings complaining about vegan cheese options. I don't miss those days. -Isa

alden, part of the reason that Lou and Bill are supposed to be killed is because meat is served in the school cafeteria. The school's idea is that in killing Bill and Lou, the college will eat them rather than eating some other random animals. So animals are going to be killed and eaten at the college regardless, and the college is giving people the option of eating one animal over another. It's "either kill this animal or another", and they are not making the not the logical step to "why are we killing any animals at all".

This whole thing is so stupid and infuriating. The "it will be an honor to eat them" attitude makes me want to barf. And aren't these oxen older? There's a reason animals are slaughtered so young for meat. I had to take livestock raising class in high school, and we were taught that the meat from older animals was "tough and gross and not worth eating" so it was usually used for things like pet food. (I mean, obviously I think all meat is gross. But I didn't think that even die-hard meat eaters would want to kill and eat elderly animals.)

I have a friend who goes to this "school" and it is terrifying how they are completely buying into such a disgusting romanticized ideal of ~local agriculture~ the school is feeding to them for $50,000 a year. My friend justsays, "we are proud to eat local" (she also eats at McDonalds and smokes cigarettes. Some environmentalist!)

alden, part of the reason that Lou and Bill are supposed to be killed is because meat is served in the school cafeteria. The school's idea is that in killing Bill and Lou, the college will eat them rather than eating some other random animals. So animals are going to be killed and eaten at the college regardless, and the college is giving people the option of eating one animal over another. It's "either kill this animal or another", and they are not making the not the logical step to "why are we killing any animals at all".

No I totally get that. I've been reading about this for a while as well. Regardless of the school's cut and dry purpose (from what I understand they teach butchering there so it's not a shock at all that they are going to kill animals and eat them), the poetic waxing being done by many of the staff and student body about the emotional tie they can have by eating them and the honor it will be is disturbing. I'm sure there are quite a few psychopaths out there that felt they had deep emotional ties to the people [because] they killed (and in some cases ate).

_________________Imma let you finish, but the Paranthropus Boisei were the greatest vegans ever.

Ugh I saw all these cave paintings complaining about vegan cheese options. I don't miss those days. -Isa